Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9174 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,602 Year: 4,859/9,624 Month: 207/427 Week: 17/103 Day: 6/11 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Directly Observed Mutation
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9006
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 13 of 50 (154357)
10-30-2004 2:55 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by RustyShackelford
10-30-2004 2:27 AM


Hardier
because there's clearly something hartier about the bacteria that survive than the bacteria that don't
Yes and in many cases the difference that makes the bacteria able to survive is a specific mutation. Mutations (or some change in heritable characteristics) and selection is evolution.
Since all such changes are cummulative these heritable, selected changes can pile up and pile up.
Again, evolution is simply the selection of heritable changes and their spread through a particular gene pool. What did you think it was?
This message has been edited by NosyNed, 10-30-2004 01:55 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by RustyShackelford, posted 10-30-2004 2:27 AM RustyShackelford has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9006
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 16 of 50 (154742)
11-01-2004 1:15 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by RustyShackelford
11-01-2004 1:10 AM


micro - macro
There was a whole thread which never finished asking what the difference is between macro and micro evolution.
The term is used occasionally in biology where micro is anything under the level of a species and macro is everything from speciation and up.
With these definitions there is evidence of both.
Now what is the definition of the two that you use?
What, very precisely, is the distinction between the two? How do I tell if a change is just under the "line" and is still micro and when it is just over the "line" and is called macro?
What mechanism is there that stops a lot of smaller changes cummulating in a totality which is a larger change?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-01-2004 1:10 AM RustyShackelford has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-01-2004 1:51 AM NosyNed has replied
 Message 19 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-01-2004 1:53 AM NosyNed has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9006
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 24 of 50 (154832)
11-01-2004 10:29 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by RustyShackelford
11-01-2004 1:51 AM


Re: micro - macro
That makes things easy then, if you use the "normal" biological definition.
Creationists, mostly, don't agree since there are lots and lots of examples of speciation and even new genera. IIRC there might even be examples of family crossing.
At the higher taxa new examples of arising aren't seen in current time, of coursem obviously. These though, being larger changes are preserved in the fossil record where something as subtle as a speciation event would not show.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-01-2004 1:51 AM RustyShackelford has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-01-2004 2:26 PM NosyNed has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9006
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 30 of 50 (154908)
11-01-2004 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by RustyShackelford
11-01-2004 2:26 PM


Speciation examples
http://EvC Forum: What is your favorite example of speciation? -->EvC Forum: What is your favorite example of speciation?
We have had a whole thread on it. I haven't reviewed it to see what is in there. I suggest that you post detailed questions to there.
Having just reviewed it I see it is a bit sparse. I'll bump it for more examples. There are a number scattered all over threads here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-01-2004 2:26 PM RustyShackelford has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9006
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 33 of 50 (154914)
11-01-2004 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by RustyShackelford
11-01-2004 2:31 PM


All people have mutated.
Rusty, you and I carry a few mutation each. I've read that the average is about 5 or 6 new mutations for each individual human. So there are some 10's of billions of new mutations being tested by the environment as we speak.
That does NOT include the variations that result by the process of producing and combining new sex cells. That is just the mutations that do NOT come from our parents.
We are ALL X-people!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-01-2004 2:31 PM RustyShackelford has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9006
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 35 of 50 (154918)
11-01-2004 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by RustyShackelford
11-01-2004 2:29 PM


Why isn't micro evolution evidence
Contrary to this (and despite Crash and Lam playing dumb), micro-evolution is no evidence for the unlimited variablity of living things.
This is a bit of a bald assertion. The question for you is:
Why isn't it evidence?
It may not, by itself, be all the evidence needed but the existance of micro-evolutionary changes is the obviously needed underpinnings for larger cumulative changes.
Since we have seen (and you will have examples by now and were given some in post 4 it seems) macro evolutionary changes as well you now need to tell us what the mechanism is that stops small changes from cummulating.
This message has been edited by NosyNed, 11-01-2004 04:54 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-01-2004 2:29 PM RustyShackelford has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9006
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 39 of 50 (154922)
11-01-2004 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by RustyShackelford
11-01-2004 2:31 PM


Mutations in Humans
Loudmouth, but if the people haven't mutated, then they haven't evolved, right?
Rusty, I've read that each human carries about 5 or so mutations on average. That means that there are a few 10's of billions of new mutations being tested by the environment as we speak.
These are actual new mutations not the wide range of genetic diversity that is generated in the formation and fusing of sex cells. All of which is part of the diversity that is available for natural selection to work on.
We are all X-people!
Additionally Loud said:
What we are talking about is new mutations previously not found in the gene pool of a species. One example is hemoglobin C, a new type of hemoglobin created by a single mutation.
That is this IS a mutation in humans.
This message has been edited by NosyNed, 11-01-2004 02:47 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-01-2004 2:31 PM RustyShackelford has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024